[yankphan]

Hi folks, I have a 2008 burg 400. What's a safe rpm speed for long freeway speeds ?

 

[TwoWheelTim]

Assuming you are talking about the engine, and not road conditions etc etc..

I like to keep mine around 6000 rpm. This yields good MPG, and with my 18g slider modification, I am cruising at 65MPH at that rpm. Next time I will be going 19g sliders for lower rpm yet.

These bike can cruise at 7000 rpm I believe without harm, and I have had mine to redline for about 3 minutes without a bit of complaint.

Cheers,

 

[cav86sv01burg?]

My guess would be what ever you feel comfortable and safe at. If you are in the US there are few places you can run at harmful rpms on a 400 that are not way over the speed limit. If you run long and hard, just keep a eye on the oil.

 

[29534]

I run mine around 7,000 and it doesn't seem to mind it at all. Mine is bone stock.

 

[Daboo]

I don't remember the rpms, but they were higher than I normally ride at. I was doing a SS1000 last June and riding at 75-80 mph from Seattle to Montana and back. The bike never skipped a beat and acted like nothing unusual had happened.

Chris

 

[yankphan]

7000 k rpm is getting me about 80-82 mph according to the speedo .... I'm sure it's about 10% fast so actually doing low 70's

 

[v8eyedoc]

7000 k rpm is getting me about 80-82 mph according to the speedo .... I'm sure it's about 10% fast so actually doing low 70's

Yesterday - I had taken a 100 mile trip on my 2008 400...averaging about 65 MPH on the highway and had changed from the stock rollers to the DPS 18 gram sliders last year. As long as i am not REDLINING..........!!!!!! I do not worry about the RPM at all.

I was going to a destination that I had not been to before and so I had my GPS with me. The indicated "speed" on the Burgman was 70 MPH BUT my GPS indicated that my actual speed was 63 MPH...!!

Also encountered a 'MEASURED MILE".........AND FOUND THAT THE ODOMETER WAS SPOT-ON....!!!!! But both the indicated speed AND MPG were off. The speedometer by 10% exactly and the MPG was also off as it read - at the end of the trip of 114 miles that i was getting 56 MPG..... BUT when I refilled the tank - It took 1.9 gallons which translates to 60 MPG. SO- the MPG indicator is also off by a small percentage , as well..!! PS: I always fill up at the same gas station and use the same pump - and make sure that i do the Burgman "BURP" also.........!!! Not a big difference (only 0.2 gallon!) BUT 0.2 gallon CAN make the difference between being stranded out on the road somewhere and making it to the next gas station............!!!

 

[lloyd123]

I haven't seen this mentioned before.

I was looking through the AN400/A service manual which has all the specs from 2007 through 2013 plus lists all the changes that were made.

The final drive ratio from 2007 thru 2009 is 5.904 but in 2010 Suzuki changed it to 6.484 so that would be an increase in rpm of about 10% if my math is correct(?). I would think this would give better acceleration but higher rpm for any given speed plus a reduction in gas milage. Maybe this was done to lock up the clutch faster to avoid glazing.

 

[Ralph M]

That makes sense my 2010 always seems to be revving harder than others report.

 

[mikeyMarine]

I haven't seen this mentioned before.

I was looking through the AN400/A service manual which has all the specs from 2007 through 2013 plus lists all the changes that were made.

The final drive ratio from 2007 thru 2009 is 5.904 but in 2010 Suzuki changed it to 6.484 so that would be an increase in rpm of about 10% if my math is correct(?). I would think this would give better acceleration but higher rpm for any given speed plus a reduction in gas milage. Maybe this was done to lock up the clutch faster to avoid glazing.

when I was buying my second one, I noticed there was a difference in the engage speed of the clutch on the 2010 not much, but it got me thinking and I went back to the 2008 when I purchased

 

[Quantum Mechanic]

I too noticed the different final drive ratio. I also noticed this was accompanied by an increase in the engines maximum revs show on the tachometer (where the redline starts). It went up from 8,500rpm to 8,950rpm on all the 2010 onwards bikes.

This DOHC 400 engine is a real gem. It's tough and loves to rev even though it has plenty of low down power for normal riding. Anyone wanting to cruise fast need not worry about the engine revs too much. Remember it's a short stroke engine...so it has a relatively low piston speed at any given revs. It's not a stressed unit at any speed and is capable of sustaining high revs for long periods without harm. 7k revs is very easy going indeed and you can hold that or even more revs all day.

 

[lloyd123]

I too noticed the different final drive ratio. I also noticed this was accompanied by an increase in the engines maximum revs show on the tachometer (where the redline starts). It went up from 8,500rpm to 8,950rpm on all the 2010 onwards bikes.

This DOHC 400 engine is a real gem. It's tough and loves to rev even though it has plenty of low down power for normal riding. Anyone wanting to cruise fast need not worry about the engine revs too much. Remember it's a short stroke engine...so it has a relatively low piston speed at any given revs. It's not a stressed unit at any speed and is capable of sustaining high revs for long periods without harm. 7k revs is very easy going indeed and you can hold that or even more revs all day.

Great observation about the piston speed - gives me some peace of mind about running it on the interstate.

I mentioned in my first post that I never noticed anyone making mention about the change in the final drive ratio before but then did a search - probably should have done that first - and noticed that you did have a post about it last year.

 

[Quantum Mechanic]

lloyd, you are extremely observant! I suspect the tacho redline has been moved to compensate for the slightly lower gearing. My Suzuki mechanic said no one has ever broken one of these that he has heard of. And he owns one too and rides it pretty near flat out most of the time covering around 15,000 miles per year. He covered 78,000 miles on his last 07 model which he bought new with no problems just consumables, which included a variator and of course rollers etc etc. Simple and cheap stuff to replace. He only sold it because he had to chance to do a really really good deal on a new 2011 model with abs.

 

[29534]

I don't understand why so many people want to decrease the rpms on our 400s. Back in my crazy and far younger days, we spent a lot of money to put 4:11 gears in our hot rods so we could outrun others in on our mountain roads. It lowered out top end (but we didn't have enough straight roads to go that fast). Since I ride crooked mountain roads, I like the higher rpms. I took a jaunt down the interstate today and ran mine at 7,400 rpms for a good while.

 

[tomfelock]

i go at 7,500 rpms for long periods because with my trike weight, I need to do that to go 65/70 mph and so far, all is good.

 

[InfernoST]

I don't understand why so many people want to decrease the rpms on our 400s. Back in my crazy and far younger days, we spent a lot of money to put 4:11 gears in our hot rods so we could outrun others in on our mountain roads. It lowered out top end (but we didn't have enough straight roads to go that fast). Since I ride crooked mountain roads, I like the higher rpms. I took a jaunt down the interstate today and ran mine at 7,400 rpms for a good while.

Reducing the RPM's will yield better fuel economy, this is the reason I wanted the RPM's decreased on my 400.

 

[tomfelock]

going slower will increase the mpg also, so what am I missing here?

 

[InfernoST]

going slower will increase the mpg also, so what am I missing here?

Not necessarily.

 

[tomfelock]

doesn't less wind resistance at slower speeds always translate into better mpg?

 

[lloyd123]

I suspect the tacho redline has been moved to compensate for the slightly lower gearing.

I also noticed in the AN400 service manual that Suziuki changed the design of the top compression piston ring. From 2007 to 2009 it was similar - same thickness throughout - to the second compression ring but in 2010 it was redesigned to have a dual thickness - "a" and "b". I'm not an engineer but perhaps this design allowed the redline to be increased as well.